Church and State

Values info= rmed by religion are essential to govern

By Dave Haigler*
July 18, 2004

http://www.reporterne= ws.com/abil/op_columns/article/0,1874,ABIL_7981_3045501,00.html<= /span>

Considering some of the pitfalls awaiting people of faith who participate in politics, thoughtful readers may be ready for some historical background on the conce= pt of separation of church and state.

The phrase ''separation of church and state'' is often misused. Opposing views = have become so polarized that the true history of the concept is lost. Secularis= ts erroneously claim this phrase comes from our founding d= ocuments, that those documents do not refer to deity and that, therefore, we a= re a secular state. The religious right says God is on its side and all good Christians should vote Republican.

The truth is somewhere between extremes.

The ''separation of church and state'' phrase traces to a letter from Thomas Jefferson to a Baptist association, reassuring that federal government would not infringe on religious rights. This was in 1802 - 26 years after the Declaration of Independence, 15 years after the Constitution.

The Declaration of Independence invokes the Lord several times, and at the adop= tion of the Constitution, most states had established Christian denominations. T= he First Amendment originally prohibited only an established federal denominat= ion. There were laws in various states into the 1840s requiring church membership for political participation and enforcing tithes to the state denomination.=

The Constitution did not mandate secularism and neither affirmed nor negated the status quo of state religions. The Founders recognized that our form of government with separation of powers mirrored the biblical concept of government by prophet, priest and king, and implicitly recognized other religious values in government structure and practice.

The First Amendment prohibition against ''establishment of religion'' referred = to the federal Congress, not states. Not until the 20th century did courts app= ly the First Amendment, using the 14th Amendment, to the states. Into the mid-= 20th century, U.S. Supreme Court decisions acknowledged that the United States was a ''Christi= an nation,'' including one authored by Justice William O. Douglass, who was ne= ver alleged to be a Christian apologist.

Fights over references to God on coins and pledges are recent. The ''school prayer= '' decision of 1963, contrary to myth, did not abolish school prayer, but mere= ly said schools (government institutions) should not dictate prayers.

M.E. Bradford's ''A Worthy Company'' (1982) shows th= at 52 of the 54 Founding Fathers were what we today call evangelical Christians, believing the Bible as God's revealed truth. Claims that most of the founde= rs were deists cannot be historically supported. Nor can the claim that the Tr= eaty of Tripoli of 1797 established a secular state. It merely distinguished America from strains of European Christianity that hated Muslims and supported holy wars against them.

John Adams, who was president when that treaty was adopted, said in an 1813 lett= er to Jefferson, ''The general principles on which the fathers achieved independence were ... the general principles of Christianity.''

A truly Christian nation will not permit discrimination against other religio= ns. The concept of liberty of conscience finds firmest roots in Christian histo= ry and doctrine, properly practiced. Given our historic Christian foundations, there is no coercion in continuing to acknowledge the same - on money, in public historical displays, in the pledge of allegiance and in ceremonial prayers. However, sectarianism should not be funded with tax dollars. =

What does this history teach? Certainly not that faith should be banned from pub= lic discourse. Law is inevitably enacted to enforce ethics. The question is who= se ethics?

I submit that all laws, for example against murder and theft, originate in religious values. Whether Christian, Jew, Muslim, Wiccan or secular humanist, your values influence your politics.

Where is the line between allowing faith to inform public policy versus establish= ing state religion? Can reason and common sense prevail between extremes? =

In struggling to find balance,= let us not swallow the lie that ''separation of church and state'' means banish= ing religious influence from government. Government cannot exist without enforc= ing values informed by religion.

*Da= ve Haigler is an Abilene attorney, mediator and arbitrator and chairman of the Taylor County Democra= tic Party. He and his wife, Becky, a Spanish teacher at = Cooper High School<= /st1:PlaceName>, attend Morning Star Community Church of Abilene.